the last guy I remember getting banned shortly after telling me the things he'd like to do (or in his case actually does) with mares was @Hokmacel
I dislike bestiality, obviously, so I don't have a problem with mods doing this. Of course, to be clear,
mentioning it is not an issue, like when the dogpill is discussed. It is just when guys make a point of saying
they are inclined to bestiality. Wanting to have sex with non-human animals is disgusting. Under no circumstances do I take a moral angle to sexual matters or anything, but under any sun this is just sick, we are dealing with sick freaks. (also, while arguably different in a sense, in the final analysis it is truly no better when dirt poor people in backwater circumstances who don't even conceptualize it fuck their donkey or whatever.) I couldn't see myself having a problem with mods consistently banning such people, because they are sick in the head and it is a circumstance where I can only respond: "I see why you're an incel."
Part of me thinks it makes sense to mention it in the rules, but then again how many abhorrent things should they be forced to mention? After a certain point, there are some things like this where it makes more sense to just see it, and ban it. (and I am someone generally inclined to if anything criticize those who say the moderation needs to be more strict, and to not necessarily think bans are justified, and to question and criticize them.)
The rules are clear that LGBT is banned and that content that would sexualize minors whatsoever is banned. That is sufficient for the rules, so this is just a circumstances where it would be excessive to mention it in the rules, but warrants being banned where it crops up.